Iggy's Journal: Three Fair Value Numbers For One Stock, And I'm Not Picking A Winner
Iggy's Journal: Three Fair Value Numbers For One Stock, And I'm Not Picking A Winner
16 September 2026, PM
Podcast Release
New podcast's up today on UOB, and this one's less about the stock and more about a problem I ran into while trying to answer a simple question. Same stock, same day, same public data, and one data provider's own two models can't agree with each other. Analyst consensus sits near $42.98. That same provider's internal fair value model comes out at $36.37, below where UOB is actually trading. Two numbers from one source, supposedly measuring the same thing, landing on opposite conclusions.
I'm not issuing a zone verdict on this one. Not because I couldn't pick a number and move on, but because the sources themselves disagree, and manufacturing certainty where the data has none isn't the kind of forensic work I want to be doing. A crowd model and analyst consensus both point to roughly a 5% discount. An internal model says the market's already paying too much. There's also a 3.9% dividend yield figure floating around that I haven't verified against a second source, so that stays out of the conclusion entirely until it checks out properly.
My Personal Take
Honestly, this episode started as a straightforward "is UOB cheap" question and turned into something more useful, a look at how easily two models from the same shop can disagree without anyone flagging it. That's the kind of thing that should make you pause before treating any single fair value number as settled fact, mine included. If you hold UOB for CPF or SRS income, the honest answer today really is "unresolved," not a hedge, an actual accurate description of where the numbers sit. Worth the listen if you want to see how I sat with that instead of forcing a tidy conclusion just to have one.
📺 YouTube: https://youtu.be/vxjZ58M8QMg
📩 Substack: https://investingiguana.com/p/uobs-fair-value-is-43-43-or-36-depending
Not financial advice. Iggy's Forensic Compliance Standards apply.
Cheers, Iggy 🦖
Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.
- twixzy·09-16 18:12A near 20% gap from one provider is not uncertainty, it's a broken calibration. That 42.98 consensus could just be averaged garbage in garbage outLikeReport
- Neexio·09-16 18:12The unverified 3.9% yield is the part I'd pause on first. If that number moves, the whole income case looks different even with fair value still unresolvedLikeReport